577
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Journal of Global Faultlines is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journalsFurthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      scite_
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      To Find or be Forgotten: Global Tensions on the Right to Erasure and Internet Governance

      research-article
      Journal of Global Faultlines
      Pluto Journals
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Google Spain v AEPD and Mario Costeja González enshrined the “right to forget” in the jurisprudence of the European Union. The judgment caused concern to transparency and open information advocates in terms of pitting a right to forget against the general right of the public to know. This, as this paper will argue, is a false distinction. The Internet is, and has always been, a regulated space. Nor is the right to free expression, even in its American form, absolute. While there are genuine concerns about how the balance is struck, evolving practice is likely to identify what cases deserve deletion, to those that do not. The biggest challenge lies in how, and who, tests that balance as to what is removed from the search engines of the Internet. Finding material is important but forgetting may be just as vital to liberties as well.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            Journal
            10.13169
            jglobfaul
            Journal of Global Faultlines
            Pluto Journals
            23977825
            20542089
            January 2015
            : 2
            : 2
            : 1-18
            Affiliations
            Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University. Email: bkampmark@ 123456gmail.com
            Article
            jglobfaul.2.2.0001
            10.13169/jglobfaul.2.2.0001
            946cbc67-5b29-4bb5-ac9a-215dd5752949
            This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            History

            Social & Behavioral Sciences

            References

            1. , “The Deciders: The Future of Privacy and Free Speech in the Age of Facebook and Google,” Fordham Law Review 80, 4 (2012): 1525–1538, 1538.

            2. Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v AEPD and Mario Costeja González (C-131/12), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?doclang=EN&text=&pageIndex=0&part=1&mode=lst&docid=152065&occ=first&dir=&cid=45442, accessed Oct 22, 2014.

            3. Electronic Frontiers Australia, “Smart Cards and RFID,” Aug 15, 2006, https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/cards.html, accessed Nov 1, 2014.

            4. , Intrusive Technologies Review, of the International Bar Association, London, n.d., http://www.ibanet.org/LPD/IP_Comm_Tech_Section/Technology_Law/Intrusive_Technologies/Overview.aspx, accessed Nov 2, 2014.

            5. See , Speech, Conduct, and the First Amendment (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2003).

            6. , “Foggy Thinking About the Right to Oblivion,” Peter Fleischer: Privacy …? Blogpost, Mar 9, 2011, http://peterfleischer.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/foggy-thinking-about-right-to-oblivion.html, accessed Oct 19, 2014.

            7. , “Now ‘right to forget’ reaches Japan: Court tells Google to delete links to criminal associate's past in fresh blow to freedom of speech,” Daily Mail , Oct 11, 2014.

            8. , Center for Democracy and Technology, Privacy Project.

            9. Viviane Reding, Vice President, European Commission, The EU Data Protection Reform 2012: Making Europe the Standard Setter for Modern Data Protection Rules in the Digital Age 5 (Jan 22, 2012).

            10. , “Regulators agree on Google's right to refuse ‘right to be forgotten’ requests,” Reuters , Sep 19, 2014.

            11. , “Regulators agree on Google's right to refuse ‘right to be forgotten’ requests.”

            12. , “Regulators agree on Google's right to refuse ‘right to be forgotten’ requests.”

            13. , Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age (NJ, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009).

            14. , “Funes El Memorioso,” in Ficciones – El Aleph – El Informe de Brodie 50 (Biblioteca Ayacuccho, 1986).

            15. , “Alexander Hemon on Jorge Luis Borges’ ‘Funes the Memorious,” Daily Best, Sep 26, 2012; noted in , “Argentina's Right to be Forgotten,” Emory International Law Review 27 (2013): 23–39, 23.

            16. , “Haunted by our Digital Past,” TAFE Bytes, Nov 27, 2012, http://tafebytes.com.au/haunted-by-our-digital-past, accessed Oct 20, 2014.

            17. and , “Drunken Facebook photos can ruin career,” The Daily Telegraph , Nov 17, 2012.

            18. , Delete , 1

            19. , Delete , 2.

            20. , “The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ – Worth Remembering?” Computer Law & Security Review 28, 2 (Apr., 2012): 143–152, 143.

            21. , Code: Version 2.0 (Perseus Books, 2006), 208.

            22. , “The Web Means the End of Forgetting,” New York Times , Jul 21, 2010.

            23. and , “The Right to Privacy,” 4 Harvard Law Review 193 (1890); , “Privacy,” 48 California Law Review 383, 389 (1960).

            24. For England, see Campbell v MGN Limited [2004] UKHL 22; Wainwright v Home Office [2003] 3 WLR 1137. For New Zealand, see Hosking v Runting [2004] 1 NZLR 1; for Australia, see Grosse v Purvis [2003] QDC 151 and Kalaba v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] FCAFC 326.

            25. TGI Seine, Oct 14 1965, JCP. 1966, II. 14482, n. Lyon-Caen; TGI Paris, 25 mars 1979, Dalloz Sirey, 1988, 198; and others cited in , “The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and the roots of the ‘right to be forgotten’,” Computer Law & Security Review 29 (2013): 229–235, 229.

            26. , “The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ – Worth Remembering?” Computer Law & Security Review 28, 2 (Apr., 2012): 143–152, 143.

            27. , “Argentina's Right to be Forgotten,” 23–4.

            28. , “The Right to be Forgotten,” Stanford Law Review Online 88 (Feb 13, 2012).

            29. , “Argentina's Right to be Forgotten,” 24.

            30. , “The Right to be Forgotten.” See also the overall protests of Rosen against such a right in “The Deciders: The Future of Privacy and Free Speech in the Age of Facebok and Google,” Fordham Law Review 80, 4 (2012): 1525–1538.

            31. , “The Right to be Forgotten.”

            32. and , “Oblivion, Erasure and Forgetting in the Digital Age,” Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law 5, 2 (2014), http://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-5-2-2014/3997, accessed Oct 26, 2014.

            33. The Economist , “Drawing the Line,” Oct 4, 2014.

            34. , “Wikipedia link removed from Google under ‘Right to be Forgotten’,” The Telegraph , Aug 4, 2014.

            35. and , “Google privacy law ‘means total rethink of basic freedoms’,” The Independent , May 30, 2014.

            36. , “Google receives 12,000 requests to be ‘forgotten’ on first day,” Sydney Morning Herald , Jun 1, 2014.

            37. , “internet freedom besieged by big businesses warns Sir Tim Berners-Lee,” V3.co.uk, Sep 29, 2014, http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2372672/internet-freedom-besieged-by-big-businesses-warns-sir-tim-berners-lee, accessed Nov 1, 2014.

            38. and , “Google privacy law ‘means total rethink of basic freedoms’.”

            39. , “The ‘Right to be Forgotten’,” 149.

            40. , “Larry Page: ‘right to be forgotten’ could empower government repression,” The Guardian , May 30, 2014.

            41. and , “Google Seeks Views in Europe on Right to be Forgotten,” The Wall Street Journal , Sep 9, 2014.

            42. and , “Google Seeks Views in Europe on Right to be Forgotten.”

            43. , “The right to be forgotten and the global reach of EU data protection law,” Concurring Opinions , Jun 1, 2014.

            44. and , “Google privacy law.”

            45. The Economist , “Drawing the Line.”

            46. , “Company directors are deep-sixing Google links citing ‘right to be forgotten’,” Fortune , Oct 21, 2014.

            47. , “Company directors are deep-sixing Google links citing ‘right to be forgotten.’”

            48. , “The ‘Right to be Forgotten’,” 151.

            49. , “Will Europe Censor This Article?”

            50. , “Convicted Murderer Sues Wikipedia, Demands Removal of His Name,” Wired , Nov 11, 2009.

            51. , “Does a murderer have the right to be forgotten?” FreeSpeechDebate, Nov 16, 2012, http://freespeechdebate.com/en/case/does-a-murderer-have-the-right-to-be-forgotten/

            52. , “Japan orders Google to ‘forget’ a user's past,” Associated Press , Oct 10, 2014.

            53. , “Foggy Thinking About the Right to Oblivion,” Privacy …?, Mar 9, 2011, http://peterfleischer.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/foggy-thinking-about-right-to-oblivion.html

            54. , “Foggy Thinking About the Right to Oblivion.”

            55. , “Google must not be left to ‘censor history’, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales warns,” The Telegraph , Jul 25, 2014.

            56. , “Will Europe Censor This Article?” The Atlantic , May 5, 2014.

            57. The Florida Star v B.J.F. 491 US 524 (1989), 530–1.

            58. González Case .

            59. , “Twitter Can't Safe You,” The New York Times , Feb 4, 2011.

            60. , “Cyberbullying bill C-13 moves on despite Supreme Court decision,” The Globe and Mail , Oct 1, 2014.

            61. , The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944).

            62. , The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (Boston: Beacon Press, 1957), 43.

            63. , The Great Transformation , 46.

            64. , The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World (London: Allen Lane, 2011).

            65. , The Net Delusion , xiii.

            66. , “China's Massive Propaganda Team Has Been Ordered To Spread ‘Positive Energy’ Online,” Business Insider Australia , Jan 20, 2013; , “Russia's Online-Comment Propaganda Army,” The Atlantic , Oct 9, 2013.

            67. 21st , “Paid Gov't and Corporate Internet Trolls Are Real,” Mar 1, 2014.

            68. Associated Press, “Israel to pay students to defend it online,” USA Today , Aug 14, 2013.

            69. , “Beyond Orwell's worst nightmare,” Huffington Post , Jan 31, 2014.

            70. and , Welcome to the Machine: Science, Surveillance and the Culture of Control (White River Junction: Chelsea Green, 2004); , Digital Diploma Mills: The Automation of Higher Education (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2001).

            71. , Address to the Australian Parliament, Sydney Morning Herald , Nov 14, 2014.

            72. , Daily Mail , Oct 11, 2014.

            73. , “Totalitarian Paranoia in the Post-Orwellian Surveillance State,” Cultural Studies (2014): 1–33.

            Comments

            Comment on this article